New Typhoon MkII

[Doc J]

Hi Gents,
Its been nearly 20 years since I designed the original Typhoon 2M, and it was first produced by RCRCM - it was their second model; the first being my Vector aerobatic plane - they were filing for bankruptcy the time, so I guess I brought them back from the brink - but thats another story.

Here is the Typhoon with its first tester - the Master, Pierre Rondel. Pics: All from Pierre. (Thanks)

A bit 'O history:

I designed the model as an allrounder and maybe a second model for a rookie pilot. It was purposely configured to be easy to install and easy to fly but as we later found out, it could turn out quite a good performance in skilled hands. The model went on to become the best selling 2M moulded model ever. I don't know how many have actually been produced but I do know its over a thousand. The model is now -dare I say it? - a classic, and I know many of you guys out there have flown the Typhoon MKI and some still do.

Now almost two decades later, especially with the advent of much smaller, very powerful servos, and tiny receivers we now enjoy; I'm thinking that the model could do with an update. I was never happy with RCRCM construction and that's reason I split with them 15 years ago, so I'll fix that problem with the new model too. I'll be producing and selling the plane muself so I thought I'd do a little pre marketing research here.

I have solicited several suggestions from my sales partners on how to update and improve the model:

1. General massive contruction, fit and finish improvements
2. Slightly slimmer fuselage but not too skinny - some of you guys seem to have banana fingers!
3. Updated wing and fin and tailplane profiles - but actually not too different from the original
4. One fuselage for glider and e-version - old slip on nose to be exchanged for a canopy.
5. Round fuse nose for 38mm diameter E-Spinner - cut off the front to 38mm Diameter for electrification
6. Rear mounted elevator and rudder servo hatch/cover with fairing
7. Dual rudder/elevator servo mount (KST 08) supplied.
8. JH 817 fast airfoil @ 8%
9. Longer flaps
10. Larger wing joiner - double the original size (that was modified from my original design by RCRCM anyway) with ballast cavities
11. Wing/Wingjoiner ballast only
12. Elevator stabilizer - no AMT
13. Full carbon wing and fuselage version option (SS)
14. Aramid/glass nose

So I'm wondering if anybody out there had anything else they'd like to see on a MKII?

Speak now, or forever hold your pieces...

Thanks guys,

Doc - who is actually quite excited at this prospect.

 

[Raymond Gaskins]

Hi Gents,
Its been nearly 20 years since I designed the original Typhoon 2M, and it was first produced by RCRCM - it was their second model; the first being my Vector aerobatic plane - they were filing for bankruptcy the time, so I guess I brought them back from the brink - but thats another story.
View attachment 13158
Here is the Typhoon with its first tester - the Master, Pierre Rondel. Pic: Pierre

A bit 'O history:

I designed the model as an allrounder and maybe a second model for a rookie pilot. It was purposely configured to be easy to install and easy to fly but as we later found out, it could turn out quite a good performance in skilled hands. The model went on to become the best selling 2M moulded model ever. I don't know how many have actually been produced but I do know its over a thousand. The model is now -dare I say it? - a classic, and I know many of you guys out there have flown the Typhoon MKI and some still do.
View attachment 13159
Now almost two decades later, especially with the advent of much smaller, very powerful servos, and tiny receivers we now enjoy; I'm thinking that the model could do with an update. I was never happy with RCRCM construction and that's reason I split with them 15 years ago, so I'll fix that problem with the new model too. I'll be producing and selling the plane muself so I thought I'd do a little pre marketing research here.
View attachment 13160

I have solicited several suggestions from my sales partners on how to update and improve the model:

1. General massive contruction, fit and finish improvements
2. Slightly slimmer fuselage but not too skinny - some of you guys seem to have banana fingers!
3. Updated wing and fin and tailplane profiles - but actually not too different from the original
4. One fuselage for glider and e-version - old slip on nose to be exchanged for a canopy.
5. Round fuse nose for 38mm diameter E-Spinner - cut off the front to 38mm Diameter for electrification
6. Rear mounted elevator and rudder servo hatch/cover with fairing
7. Dual rudder/elevator servo mount (KST 08) supplied.
8. JH 817 fast airfoil @ 8%
9. Longer flaps
10. Larger wing joiner - double the original size (that was modified from my original design by RCRCM anyway) with ballast cavities
11. Wing/Wingjoiner ballast only
12. Elevator stabilizer - no AMT
13. Full carbon wing and fuselage version option (SS)
14. Aramid/glass nose

So I'm wondering if anybody out there had anything else they'd like to see on a MKII?
View attachment 13161

Speak now, or forever hold your pieces...

Thanks guys,

Doc - who is actually quite excited at this prospect.

I would like two of the initial run and will be using electric assist! I like the setup as is and prefer the glass version.
Raymond

 

[Doc J]

I would like two of the initial run and will be using electric assist! I like the setup as is and prefer the glass version.
Raymond

You seem to be becoming an Aeroic fan, Raymond!

Don't quite understand "setup as is" can you elaborate?

Cheers,

Doc.

 

[gp49]

There are coupe of things that I can think of that are really annoying when building a new glider or refurbishing a second hand one.

Number one is external antenna placement. I hate drilling holes and then worry if I got them in the right place. Assuming that the fuse is good old carbon it would be great to have a coupe antenna exist build in with fairings to make it more slippery.

Number two is battery type/size vs. where to put it in the fuse. Decide on the shape/size of the battery that can be readily purchased. Slope fuse - LiFe battery; Power fuse - LiPo;

The last thing that comes to mind is the retention of the wings and the tail feathers. Like most, I use tape. Cheap, easy to apply --- Cheap looking on a $1000+ glider. How about some magnets that are build into the joiner, and at the end of the joiner box that will keep the wings where they need to be (look at the current Jester made by Mike @ https://www.majesticrc.us/ )

 

[Raymond Gaskins]

Doc,
I like the changes you outlined above from the MK1 Typhoon. That is what I was referring to as “setup”.
When you get time, I would still appreciate Julia’s recommendations regarding sourcing of Taiwan high mountain tea. I want to order some asap️
Raymond

 

[Doc J]

Doc,
I like the changes you outlined above from the MK1 Typhoon. That is what I was referring to as “setup”.
When you get time, I would still appreciate Julia’s recommendations regarding sourcing of Taiwan high mountain tea. I want to order some asap️
Raymond

Hi Raymond. Julia will find out fo you.

Cheers,

Doc.

 

[Doc J]

Hi GP - more below.

There are coupe of things that I can think of that are really annoying when building a new glider or refurbishing a second hand one.

Number one is external antenna placement. I hate drilling holes and then worry if I got them in the right place. Assuming that the fuse is good old carbon it would be great to have a coupe antenna exist build in with fairings to make it more slippery.

I don't quite understand this GP - do you have any pics of what you ar referring to? What does a good antenna setup look like?

Number two is battery type/size vs. where to put it in the fuse. Decide on the shape/size of the battery that can be readily purchased. Slope fuse - LiFe battery; Power fuse - LiPo;

OK, wouldn't the power battery be a heck of a lot larger than the slope fuse? In any case I will make it to fit standard sized batteries.

The last thing that comes to mind is the retention of the wings and the tail feathers. Like most, I use tape. Cheap, easy to apply --- Cheap looking on a $1000+ glider. How about some magnets that are build into the joiner, and at the end of the joiner box that will keep the wings where they need to be (look at the current Jester made by Mike @ https://www.majesticrc.us/ )

Now this is interesting. I have been theough this many times. So far its even as 50% of the people like the RE Magnet retainers and 50% of them don't.

The Nays that don't like magnets, don't like them because they say the wing comes free very suddenly and that can sometimes damage the wing/fuse servo plugs, and also they cite the danger of squeezing the wing too hard when trying to decouple it.
They say that tape is a knd of mechanical fuse, and also covers the wing/fiselage gap if done right, but they emphasise that you have to use stretchy PVC electrical tape. Clear tape or any of the other messy stuff that leaves the nasty adhesive deposits behind on the plane is obviously not a good choice.

The Yays that like magnets prefer them because they are cleaner than tape, and look more professional.

Incidentally I'm guessing that strong magnets will have no effect on the radio gear? - is that correct? I don't know much about electronics.

Thanks for the input and looking forward to your responses.

Cheers,

Doc.

 

[SailHigh]

Now you are peaking my interest Doc. As a former Typhoon flier for seven seasons, flying her in anything from 15 to 45 mph wind conditions, inland or coastal sites, I absolutely loved my carbon typhoon. She was easily keeping up with the latest offerings out there with various ballast loadings. Two issues that come to mind right now (maybe more later), was the weakness of aft fuse and fast landing speed. It was very common to see the fuselage break right past the TE fairings, even for carbon fuselages. I think this had to do with sudden cross sectional changes in that area, concentrating harder than expected landing loads in that zone. Mine broke in that area, performed a nice fix, flew it for two more seasons, broke it again and gave up on the re-repairing it. Again a very common issue.

Second issue was faster than expected landing speed. I always thought the typhoon, given it's weight and wing loading lands faster than it should. This was quited evident in low head wind landings compared to other comparable 2 meter ships. I know you formerly stated to Typhoon pilots, something to the effects of To Learn to land better, faster landing speeds is probably responsible to the first issue of aft fuse breakage, which I think your suggestion of larger flaps may address the two issues. Hopefully the larger flaps don't take away from the Typhoons exceptional roll performance by taking away effective aileron area.

As for the front of the fuselage, I really hope the cross section doesn't get smaller. Fitment of electronics was already tight,but doable task with the current design. I'm sorry but I'm not in the camp that believes a small frontal section improves the performance of the model so much. The vast majority of the drag of a plane comes from the wing. There may be some improvement in the top end speed, but how often do we fly in that region? Usability, practicality and structural integrity take precedence in a sport model. As I'm sure you've heard the old aviation adage that an airplane is just a series of compromises flying in close formation!

As for antenna placement, that GP addressed, I really hope that front of the fuse, even for carbon fuse, is composed of fiberglass (like current design), or preferable Kevlar, both 2.4 ghz friendly material, eliminating the need for messy external antenna placement. The FG front fuse has held up well over the years due to it's glass layup and large cross section.

Looking forward to hear more about the new Typhoon.

Sean

 

[Johnnashville]

Room in the nose for modern batteries, 18650 or 18500 packs

 

[Doc J]

Hi Sean - nice to hear from another veteran!

I have put in some comments below:

Cheers,

Doc

Now you are peaking my interest Doc. As a former Typhoon flier for seven seasons, flying her in anything from 15 to 45 mph wind conditions, inland or coastal sites, I absolutely loved my carbon typhoon. She was easily keeping up with the latest offerings out there with various ballast loadings.

Actually I think a lot of people - mostly me (!) - were surprised by the Typhoon's performance. I heard that one lad got 300 Mph out of her before the (too skinny!) wing joiner broke. Crikey.

Two issues that come to mind right now (maybe more later), was the weakness of aft fuse and fast landing speed. It was very common to see the fuselage break right past the TE fairings, even for carbon fuselages. I think this had to do with sudden cross sectional changes in that area, concentrating harder than expected landing loads in that zone. Mine broke in that area, performed a nice fix, flew it for two more seasons, broke it again and gave up on the re-repairing it. Again a very common issue.

Do you know Sean - the ONLY comments I have had up to now on the Typhoon have been on poor construction. This is why I split with RCRCM 15 years ago. Their idea was that if the model was weak and it broke easily, the the flyer woud soon replace it. That philosophy has not done them any good, but they continue to sell. Models produced by me no longer have that problem I'm happy to say.

Having said that, I will take a long look at the fuselage cross sections and transitions when I get going on the new MKII design - which, incidentally, will be...TODAY!

Second issue was faster than expected landing speed. I always thought the typhoon, given it's weight and wing loading lands faster than it should. This was quited evident in low head wind landings compared to other comparable 2 meter ships. I know you formerly stated to Typhoon pilots, something to the effects of To Learn to land better, faster landing speeds is probably responsible to the first issue of aft fuse breakage, which I think your suggestion of larger flaps may address the two issues. Hopefully the larger flaps don't take away from the Typhoons exceptional roll performance by taking away effective aileron area.

Hmmm...itneresting - this is the first time I remember hearing that. It's especially interesting for me as I'm an advocate of the 'helicopter' slope edge landing: Full flaps down at 85~90, and using the flaps/ailerons to helicopter down close to the slope edge where everyone can see the model. I dont like the backside/sudden flaps down landings.

Anyway - I wll be changing the section to a new one which gives more acceleration and a slower landing speed and the control surface proportions will change with that to be a bit larger. (25%) I have used this one on the Forza (2.5M) and it seems to work really well.

As for the front of the fuselage, I really hope the cross section doesn't get smaller. Fitment of electronics was already tight,but doable task with the current design. I'm sorry but I'm not in the camp that believes a small frontal section improves the performance of the model so much. The vast majority of the drag of a plane comes from the wing. There may be some improvement in the top end speed, but how often do we fly in that region? Usability, practicality and structural integrity take precedence in a sport model. As I'm sure you've heard the old aviation adage that an airplane is just a series of compromises flying in close formation!

I think you must be one of the banana-handed bunch! But you are right about the size of the front section of the fuselage. In fact a larger section could actually be faster than a broom stick if correctly designed. I'll be paring a bit - probably only 5mm which will take it from 53mm (2") at the widest to 48mm, but you won't be seeing anything like the Corsa for example - where I really had my knife out (!)

What will make it easier is that the servos will now be installed - if you want to - at the rear of the fuselage in the fin, below the tailplane. NO more carbon rods etc. The canopy will be large enough to get a big power battery in, so no problem there and all you have to do is place the battery/receiver in the front. The old system of front mounted servos and carbon rods will still be possible though.

As for antenna placement, that GP addressed, I really hope that front of the fuse, even for carbon fuse, is composed of fiberglass (like current design), or preferable Kevlar, both 2.4 ghz friendly material, eliminating the need for messy external antenna placement. The FG front fuse has held up well over the years due to it's glass layup and large cross section.

All my models feature well-overlapped Glass and Kevlar front ends.

Looking forward to hear more about the new Typhoon.

Sean

Thanks for the interest and the response Sean.

 

[Doc J]

Room in the nose for modern batteries, 18650 or 18500 packs

Hi John - I think the battery will be 18 x 65mm in size and each cell is 3.6V - correct?

So for a 7.5V receiver pack, only two cells are needed and that will go into the new fuselage with ease. In fact 8 cells (28.8V) will fit just fine.

Cheers,

Doc.

 

[Johnnashville]

Hi John - what sizes are they?

Thanks,

James.

James

The 18650 cell is the most common and is available in several chemistries , Life or Lion,
The cell is 18mm diameter by 65mm length
The cells can be made into a 2s stick configuration (18mm diameter X 130mm) or a 2s shotgun (36mm by 65mm)

I was just thinking about slop receiver packs and didn't consider motor packs, sorry, one track mind.

link to an 18650
https://alofthobbies.com/collections/batteries/products/qb18650-3000mah-li-ion-flat-top-battery

 

[Doc J]

James

The 18650 cell is the most common and is available in several chemistries , Life or Lion,
The cell is 18mm diameter by 65mm length
The cells can be made into a 2s stick configuration (18mm diameter X 130mm) or a 2s shotgun (36mm by 65mm)

I was just thinking about slop receiver packs and didn't consider motor packs, sorry, one track mind.

link to an 18650
https://alofthobbies.com/collections/batteries/products/qb18650-3000mah-li-ion-flat-top-battery

Thanks John!

 

[Wayne]

Yep 2 18650 in either a stack or a stick pack would be handy.

I thought the world of my Typhoon back in the day. It was my first moldy and flew it for a few seasons. It landed well, but needed full rates on the elevator when in full crow. I usually flew with middle rates on the elevator. A normal elevator Doc will use will cure this issue.

I found her pretty easy to spot land. She offered good performance, but not as good as Doc's newer wing designs, that is for sure.

I liked the molded in servo tray with slip on nose. When the radio was installed well, this was a work of art. Sadly some people hacked it to pieces.

 

[Doc J]

Yep 2 18650 in either a stack or a stick pack would be handy.

I thought the world of my Typhoon back in the day. It was my first moldy and flew it for a few seasons. It landed well, but needed full rates on the elevator when in full crow. I usually flew with middle rates on the elevator. A normal elevator Doc will use will cure this issue.

I found her pretty easy to spot land. She offered good performance, but not as good as Doc's newer wing designs, that is for sure.

I liked the molded in servo tray with slip on nose. When the radio was installed well, this was a work of art. Sadly some people hacked it to pieces.

Thanks Wayne!

Today is design day...

Doc.

 

[agarchitect]

Doc,

I still fly a Typhoon just about every time I go to the slope. It is a great all-rounder. Perfect mid-size, easy to see and assemble. Hoping it still has the same good looks and profile with a few comments below.and from other "veterans".

I do hope you will keep the shotgun style molded-in fuse ballast chamber. It is super convenient to load and unload and holds a lot of weight. Added ballast in the wings and/or wing joiner would be a plus for the 40+ mph days.

I would not mind loosing the full flying stab, but a slip-on style stab like the Stormbird would be nice. Something easy to assemble and disassemble for travel and storage.

And tips that are just slightly less pointy and sharp would be good. After several outings the tips tend to break off and out comes the sanding bar to ease the edges.

I still use NiMH batteries so as long as a good size 5cell fits I'll be happy.

How about an all naked carbon version...no color at all. Leave that up to the buyer.

Thanks for keeping the Typhoon alive. If one could only have one plane the Typhoon might be it.

Adam

 

[Doc J]

Hi Adam - long time no see!

Please see below.

Doc

Doc,

I still fly a Typhoon just about every time I go to the slope. It is a great all-rounder. Perfect mid-size, easy to see and assemble. Hoping it still has the same good looks and profile with a few comments below.and from other "veterans".

I do hope you will keep the shotgun style molded-in fuse ballast chamber. It is super convenient to load and unload and holds a lot of weight. Added ballast in the wings and/or wing joiner would be a plus for the 40+ mph days.

Now that's one thing that might have to go because I want to make one fuselage to suit both slope and electric, so the slip-on nosecone has to go, much as I like it. Unless I can thnk of a cunning stunt to keep it; on the MKII the ballast will have to go in the wings and wing joiner. Hmmm Let me see...

I would not mind loosing the full flying stab, but a slip-on style stab like the Stormbird would be nice. Something easy to assemble and disassemble for travel and storage.

Yes that's in the improvement plan.

And tips that are just slightly less pointy and sharp would be good. After several outings the tips tend to break off and out comes the sanding bar to ease the edges.

I think you might have to pre-sand if you want to lose the sharp tips, as that and the same on the tailplanes are the only two places that actually need to be pointy.

I still use NiMH batteries so as long as a good size 5cell fits I'll be happy.

No problem, the front end is almost exactly the same size.

How about an all naked carbon version...no color at all. Leave that up to the buyer.

Can be done but I think you might be in a minority on that request - dont leave it in the sun

Thanks for keeping the Typhoon alive. If one could only have one plane the Typhoon might be it.

Thanks for the compliment Adam!

Adam

 

[Doc J]

Hi Wayne, Mo, Belo.

Yep 2 18650 in either a stack or a stick pack would be handy.

Yep, I'm designing for that.

I thought the world of my Typhoon back in the day. It was my first moldy and flew it for a few seasons. It landed well, but needed full rates on the elevator when in full crow.

I didn't realize it, but actually the Typhoon was the first mouldy for many people - some even used it as a trainer. I kind of feel happy that my efforts those years ago have been part of so many people's enjoyment.

I usually flew with middle rates on the elevator. A normal elevator Doc will use will cure this issue.

Yes, that's going to be on the new one, with a very slightly modified horizontal stab shape so that it can use the elevator more effectively - more like the Forza.

I found her pretty easy to spot land. She offered good performance, but not as good as Doc's newer wing designs, that is for sure.

Well, in a away, thats one of the reasons for the upgrade. Technology develops over time, and it would be a shame not to give the new model a performance boost.

I liked the molded in servo tray with slip on nose. When the radio was installed well, this was a work of art. Sadly some people hacked it to pieces.

Gone, gone, gone - along with the shotgun fuselage ballast (that we all liked) as I have to make a canopy type now, rather than the slip-on nose cone in order to cover the electric fuselage requirement.

But apart from those, its unchanged!

Hopefully it will look the same as the classic "T" but fly (and survive) better.

Cheers and thanks for the thoughts.

Doc.

 

[Wayne]

NO - Got to keep the tray, slip on nose and ballast tube for the glider version.

Yes, it can be done.

You have 2 different noses, one glider, one electric. The tail boom can be the same. Correct me if I am wrong, but the nose section gets bonded to the tail section, right? So just have 2 different options. This is what Blezjk does with good results. The electric can be a normal nose with a battery opening.

 

[Doc J]

NO - Got to keep the tray, slip on nose and ballast tube for the glider version.

Yes, it can be done.

You have 2 different noses, one glider, one electric. The tail boom can be the same. Correct me if I am wrong, but the nose section gets bonded to the tail section, right? So just have 2 different options. This is what Blezjk does with good results. The electric can be a normal nose with a battery opening.

Hmm - thanks Wayne.

Shows you how rusty I am.

Actually I have done this before a couple of times - Forza is a good example...It will mean an extra small mould but...food for thought...I can save in other places probably.

I have done a sketch of the fuselage aready - I was just going to do the final - good timing.

I'll PM you pics of the final drawing.

Cheers,

J